<p>Allooo~
</p><p>This is, in fact, a vote to change policy, do not worry (or maybe you should).
</p><p>Currently, the "guidelines" for creating an article for a topic is 300 pages (4,500 posts) for RPs and Chatrooms and 75 pages (1,125 posts) for topics that do not fall under the former categories. Besides the common sense rule, these are the only guidelines for creating articles for topics.
</p><p>There are several stories on the MBs that are quite popular, noticeable by their like count. An example would be our lovely Skulduggery's stories, specifically "A Kingdom of Mods " and "Trial and War." These are the first and second stories in his still unnamed (as far as I know) trilogy. These stories, although not as popular as the last, both have over 6,000 likes, but <i>do not</i> meet MoS as they both have less than 1,125 posts. I would consider these stories quite important to the Message Boards, specifically the Stories Subforum, and there are a few others that are also very liked but do not have a lot of posts. More examples would "Ninja " by Scorpio360 and "Cucumberman " by M4Jesus.
</p><p>I propose we make MoS a bit clearer when it comes to story topics, as they can be considered just as important as popular chatrooms such as Brickbook or Finding Friendships. Thank you for your time.
</p><p>I would like to clarify that if you do not vote for A or B but vote for the other, I will count it as you do not want a post/like requirement added or changed.
</p><p>A) Decrease post requirement for story topics.
----1) Make requirement 33 pages (500 posts):
----2) Make requirement 50 pages (750 posts): 6
----3) Make requirement 66 pages (1000 posts):
----4) Make requirement 20 pages (300 posts): 2
----5) Do not change posts requirements: 2
----6) Other. Explain in vote.
</p><p>B) Add a like requirement for story topics.
----1) Make requirement 1,500 likes: 2
----2) Make requirement 2,000 likes: 1
----3) Make requirement 2,500 likes:
----4) Make requirement 10 likes: 1
----5) Do not add one: 6
----6) Other. Explain in vote.
</p><p>C) Change nothing: 3
</p><p>D) "Allow" common sense to be used by patrollers and content mods: 1
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Consensus">Consensus</span></h2>
<p>A2 B5: Requirement 50 pages (750 posts), no like requirement
</p>
5,988
pages
ALL POSTS
All posts by Ked830
0
<div class="quote">Sky-Pirate Doubloon wrote:
no, absolutely not, most certainly not, of course not, under no circumstances, by no means, not at all, negative, never, not really, nay, nope, uh-uh, nah, not on your life, no way, no way José, ixnay</div> <p>how negative </p>
no, absolutely not, most certainly not, of course not, under no circumstances, by no means, not at all, negative, never, not really, nay, nope, uh-uh, nah, not on your life, no way, no way José, ixnay</div> <p>how negative </p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<div class="quote">Rapmilo wrote:
I wish I could vote, but I don't qualify since I don't edit mainspace articles on here :P <p>But if it matters, my gut feeling is C. The current system from what I've seen looks good. We have (relatively) major topics that are added as pages. </p> </div> <p>unless you don't want your vote to count as a vote, I'm gonna count it as a vote, that okay? </p>
I wish I could vote, but I don't qualify since I don't edit mainspace articles on here :P <p>But if it matters, my gut feeling is C. The current system from what I've seen looks good. We have (relatively) major topics that are added as pages. </p> </div> <p>unless you don't want your vote to count as a vote, I'm gonna count it as a vote, that okay? </p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<div class="quote">Impossibubbles wrote:
A, 2 <p>4, I don't wanna bother with a nice requirement </p> </div> <p>what would you suggest? </p>
A, 2 <p>4, I don't wanna bother with a nice requirement </p> </div> <p>what would you suggest? </p>
(Edited by Ked830)
1
<div class="quote">Johnyjo wrote:
Oh, I had no idea we already had such things. :P Maybe I'll devote some time to adding more information to them. XP</div> <p>if you'd like to do that please go ahead lol. If you need help arranging it or anything I'm sure some of the active editors, myself being one, would be able to help you with that :P </p>
Oh, I had no idea we already had such things. :P Maybe I'll devote some time to adding more information to them. XP</div> <p>if you'd like to do that please go ahead lol. If you need help arranging it or anything I'm sure some of the active editors, myself being one, would be able to help you with that :P </p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<p>We have a few stories here already link. We just apply the 75 page rule to them i think.
</p><p>Sure we could probably add a bit more info about the stories themselves, but idk if stuff like a summary or character list is important really, seems like a bit too much work. If there are people who want to do that though that's fine, but other than that, nah
</p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
<div class="quote">Alemas2005 wrote:
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
Archives already all link to the current, post-update page about the user, which in turn link to their profile pages. This seems unnecessary, B.</div>
Ahem.</div>Sloop never had a post-update page? Weird. Seems like we could just create one now, for consistency. <p>Despite that outlier Alemas linked, I agree with Loney, B. </p> </div>he did have a post-update page, but it was deleted two days ago because it "Did not meet MoS"</div>I don't know why you're using quotes, it was acceptable to delete them
</div>i was quoting the deletion reason
<p>also was it decided on that it was acceptable to delete them
</p>
</div>Yes, Bubbles and I went through the deleted articles and made sure there weren't any exceptions that would allow them to be undeleted.
</div>
<p>alrightie
</p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: </p><p>
</p> <div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
<div class="quote">Alemas2005 wrote:
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
Archives already all link to the current, post-update page about the user, which in turn link to their profile pages. This seems unnecessary, B.</div>
Ahem.</div>Sloop never had a post-update page? Weird. Seems like we could just create one now, for consistency. <p>Despite that outlier Alemas linked, I agree with Loney, B. </p> </div>he did have a post-update page, but it was deleted two days ago because it "Did not meet MoS"</div>I don't know why you're using quotes, it was acceptable to delete them
</div>i was quoting the deletion reason
<p>also was it decided on that it was acceptable to delete them
</p>
</div>Yes, Bubbles and I went through the deleted articles and made sure there weren't any exceptions that would allow them to be undeleted.
</div>
<p>alrightie
</p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
<div class="quote">Alemas2005 wrote:
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
Archives already all link to the current, post-update page about the user, which in turn link to their profile pages. This seems unnecessary, B.</div>
Ahem.</div>Sloop never had a post-update page? Weird. Seems like we could just create one now, for consistency. <p>Despite that outlier Alemas linked, I agree with Loney, B. </p> </div>he did have a post-update page, but it was deleted two days ago because it "Did not meet MoS" </div>I don't know why you're using quotes, it was acceptable to delete them
</div>
<p>i was quoting the deletion reason
</p><p>also was it decided on that it was acceptable to delete them
</p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
<div class="quote">Alemas2005 wrote:
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
Archives already all link to the current, post-update page about the user, which in turn link to their profile pages. This seems unnecessary, B.</div>
Ahem.</div>Sloop never had a post-update page? Weird. Seems like we could just create one now, for consistency. <p>Despite that outlier Alemas linked, I agree with Loney, B. </p> </div>he did have a post-update page, but it was deleted two days ago because it "Did not meet MoS" </div>I don't know why you're using quotes, it was acceptable to delete them
</div>
<p>i was quoting the deletion reason
</p><p>also was it decided on that it was acceptable to delete them
</p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<div class="quote">Riolu777 wrote:
<div class="quote">Alemas2005 wrote:
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
Archives already all link to the current, post-update page about the user, which in turn link to their profile pages. This seems unnecessary, B.</div>
Ahem. </div>Sloop never had a post-update page? Weird. Seems like we could just create one now, for consistency. <p>Despite that outlier Alemas linked, I agree with Loney, B. </p> </div> <p>he did have a post-update page, but it was deleted two days ago because it "Did not meet MoS" </p>
<div class="quote">Alemas2005 wrote:
<div class="quote">Loney 97 wrote:
Archives already all link to the current, post-update page about the user, which in turn link to their profile pages. This seems unnecessary, B.</div>
Ahem. </div>Sloop never had a post-update page? Weird. Seems like we could just create one now, for consistency. <p>Despite that outlier Alemas linked, I agree with Loney, B. </p> </div> <p>he did have a post-update page, but it was deleted two days ago because it "Did not meet MoS" </p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<div class="quote">HyperFlash Studios wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: this is not a vote so i do not have to vote for or against it, correct? </p> </div>Yeah, the "voting" is really just so we can say "ok admins, the community wants this so do it pls" </div> <p>oh </p><p>
</p><p>B then, don't believe we need anymore badges, the competitiveness is fine and wouldn't really be added to by re-adding those badges imo </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>Ked830 wrote: this is not a vote so i do not have to vote for or against it, correct? </p> </div>Yeah, the "voting" is really just so we can say "ok admins, the community wants this so do it pls" </div> <p>oh </p><p>
</p><p>B then, don't believe we need anymore badges, the competitiveness is fine and wouldn't really be added to by re-adding those badges imo </p>
(Edited by Ked830)
0
<p>this is not a vote so i do not have to vote for or against it, correct?
</p>
(Edited by Ked830)